Information, observations, and analysis from the James River valley on the Northern Plains-----
E-Mail: Enter 'Beacon' in subject box. Send to: Minnekota@Referencedesk.org
The Aberdeen American News is a wretched rag. While it makes token efforts to look like a newspaper, it models itself after the old Pravda in that it selects what it publishes based upon a mind control doctrine in which the editors determine what the public should and should not read. We are not condemning its right to voice opinions on its editorial page, although we reserve our right to point out that its endorsements this election season exceed its own standards of incoherent stupidity. Nothing that the American News takes a stance on seems to have any connection with reality.
Today, it endorsed HB1215, Referred Law 6, the abortion ban. That is the newspaper's right.
What is not right is its effort to control public opinion.
The letters-to-the-editor columns have been filled with letters urging a yes vote on Referred Law 6, with sometimes one letter urging a no vote appearing on the page as a cover-your-ass token against charges of manipulating the letters published. We know there have been many letters in opposition to the ban. The Aberdeen office of the Campaign for Healthy Families claims that they have at least a dozen complaints filed that letters opposing Referred Law 6 have been submitted but never published by the American News.
The Aberdeen Abominable Newsfraud has never made but the most cursory efforts--for the sake of appearance only--to publish comprehensive, accurate, and documented news. Rather, it adheres to party-line control so that what ekes out reflects a world that exists only in the mind of a few editors who dream the totalitarian dream. And that is because they are incompetent journalists.
Our main opposition to Referred Law 6 is that it is based upon the presumption that the state needs to take control of women's ovaries because the women are not morally competent to determine their reproductive choices. It omits any exceptions for rape and incest, meaning that women who may be impregnated in such situations will be forced to carry the genetic strains of rapists and relatives suffering demented perversions to term. In a state that likes to build prisons and hunt offenders of bad laws as a malicious sport, this measure seems calculated to maintain a good supply of game. It does for the slavering righteous what Pheasants Forever and Ducks Unlimited do for sportsmen who have not graduated to human game. And like the slaveowners of yore who forced slave women to carry to term the get of the owners themselves to keep the labor supply filled, women in South Dakota will be given the experience of having their bodies taken over by the state, which will have nothing to do with the get produced once it has emerged from the womb. Not at least until said get qualifies as fodder for the criminal justice system. The proponents of the abortion ban claim that "science" has shown that each zygote is a unique human being right from the moment that sperm penetrates egg. What science knows is that each zygote has the potential of becoming a human being, and it also knows that there is such a thing as a bad seed in which a woman will be forced to bring to term an organism genetically destined to offenses against humanity, if that is what its uniqueness entails.
The abortion ban itself was conceived in a fraudulent legislative process. It formed a Task Force which stacked the materials it examined so that it heard only people who want to impose totalitarian restrictions on women and dismissed in their report the few people who were allowed to speak in oppostion to the subjugation of women. The Task Force states that its conclusions that a human life is formed immediately upon fertilization are supported by scientific advances since 1973. The scientific advances have been in the ability to capture images of the corporeal development, but also in the ability to measure the degree of sentience. A zygote becomes a fetus and a fetus becomes an organism capable of sensation and the potential for viability as a human late into the development. HB1215 contains fraudulent statements about science and about the puppets the Task Force selected to support their predetermined case.
One need not read any further than the first paragraph of HB1215 to see what a sham this law is based upon. This law never received the kind of critical debate that such legislation should receive in a truly democratic system. The law itself was conceived through a kind of forcible rape that a single-party system can commit on its constituents and get away with.
We sympathize with people who sincerely oppose abortion. We do not sympathize with people who use the issue to open the door to totalitarian control of the most private, personal, and vital factor that women have to face in determining their own lives. It takes a journalistic fraud in complicity with the scheming dictators to dupe the public into accepting subservience in the name of a false morality. The lies in the first paragraph of the law should be enough to condemn it. It asserts that the right-to-life of a zygote supercedes the right of a woman to determine her own life and whether she should allow her body to be the host for an organism that has no human viability.
Enough said. If this law is approved by voters, people who want true liberty, equality, and justice may well have to make some relocation plans.
Here is the first paragraph:The Legislature accepts and concurs with the conclusion of the South Dakota Task Force to Study Abortion, based upon written materials, scientific studies, and testimony of witnesses presented to the task force, that life begins at the time of conception, a conclusion confirmed by scientific advances since the 1973 decision of Roe v. Wade, including the fact that each human being is totally unique immediately at fertilization. Moreover, the Legislature finds, based upon the conclusions of the South Dakota Task Force to Study Abortion, and in recognition of the technological advances and medical experience and body of knowledge about abortions produced and made available since the 1973 decision of Roe v. Wade, that to fully protect the rights, interests, and health of the pregnant mother, the rights, interest, and life of her unborn child, and the mother's fundamental natural intrinsic right to a relationship with her child, abortions in South Dakota should be prohibited. Moreover, the Legislature finds that the guarantee of due process of law under the Constitution of South Dakota applies equally to born and unborn human beings, and that under the Constitution of South Dakota, a pregnant mother and her unborn child, each possess a natural and inalienable right to life.